Abdul Azim vs State of U.P. and Others

Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.—Notice on behalf of the opposite party Nos. 1 to 4 has been accepted by the learned Chief Standing Counsel and notice on behalf of the opposite party No. 7 has been accepted by Mr. Afzal Siddiqui, Advocate.

In view of the order passed as under, there is no need to issue notice to the opposite party No. 5 and 6.

Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Afzal Siddiqui, learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 7 as well as learned Standing Counsel and perused the records.

The writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of quowarranto against the opposite party No. 6-Anwar Ahmad (Anwar Jalalpuri), who is holding the office of the Chairman, U.P. Board of Madarsa Education (hereinafter referred to as the ''Board''). The notification dated 21.12.2010 issued by the State Government regarding the appointment of opposite party No. 6 has also been challenged.

The traditional Muslim Education system is imparted through Madarsa which was previously governed under no statutory rules formulated by the Government of U.P. known as "U.P. Akaskiya Arabi, Tatha Farsi Madarson Ki Manyata Evam Sewa Niyamawali, 1987". In order to streamline the Madarsa Education system, the State Government enacted U.P. Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as the ''Act of 2004'').

Under the Act of 2004, the Board imparts education in Arbi, Farsi, Urdu, Tibb, Islamic Studies, Logic and Philosophy and other subjects. The Board consists of a Chairman, a Director, who shall be the Vice-chairperson, Members belonging to Sunni & Shia Sect and certain other officers and officials as provided under the Act of 2004.

Section 3 of the Act of 2004 in this regard is quoted herein below:

(1) With effect from such date as the State Government may, by notification, appoint, there shall be established at Lucknow a Board to be known as the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa-Education.

(2) The Board shall be a body corporate.

(3) The Board shall consist of the following members namely:

(a) a renowned Muslim educationist in the filed of traditional Madarsa-Education, nominated by the State Government who shall be the Chairperson of the Board;

(b) the Director, who shall be the Vice-Chairperson of the Board;

(c) the Principal, Government Oriental College, Rampur;

(d) one Sunni-Muslim Legislator to be elected by both houses of the State Legislature;

(e) one Shia-Muslim Legislator to be elected by both houses of the State Legislature;

(f) one representative of National Council of Educational Research and Training;

(g) two head of institution established and administered by Sunni-Muslim nominated by the State Government;

(h) one head of institution established and administered by Shia-Muslim nominated by the State Government;

(i) two teachers of institutions established and administered by Sunni-Muslim nominated by the State Government;

(j) one teacher of an institution established and administered by Shia-Muslim nominated by the State Government;

(k) one Science or Tibb teacher of an institution nominated by the State Government;

(l) the Account and Finance Officer in the Directorate of Minority Welfare, Uttar Pradesh;

(m) the Inspector;

(n) an officer not below the rank of Deputy Director nominated by the State Government, who shall be the member Registrar.

By the present writ petition, the Petitioner has challenged the appointment of present incumbent on the post of Chairperson of the Board i.e. opposite party No. 6-Anwar Ahmad (Anwar Jalalpuri) on the ground that he does not fulfill the eligibility criteria prescribed for the post of Chairperson of the Board.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner tried to emphasise that the present incumbent is not a renowned Muslim Educationist in the field of traditional Madarsa Education and therefore, he is not competent to hold the post of Chairperson of the Board.

In fact, the appointment of the Chairperson of the Board has been under challenge from the very beginning. Earlier the appointment on the post of Chairperson of Sri Haji Rizwanul Haqe was challenged in Writ Petition No. 55955 of 2008; Abdul Haq Khan v. State of U.P. and Ors. and Writ Petition No. 20510 of 2008; the Teacher Association Madarsa Arabia and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Ors. before this Court at Allahabad which were allowed by judgment and order dated 29.5.2009 and the notification dated 14.12.2007 regarding the appointment of Sri Haji Rizwanul Haque as Chairperson and Sri Gayasuddin Nadvi as Member of the Board was quashed. Thereafter by Office Memorandum dated 06.4.2010, they were removed from the post of Chairperson and Member respectively. By another notification dated 06.4.2010, one Sri Mohd. Ahsan Raza Khan was nominated as Chairperson of the Board. The appointment of Sri Mohd. Ahsan Raza Khan was also challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No. 8307 (MB) of 2010; wherein this Court vide order dated 25.8.2010 has observed as under:

We are prima facie satisfied that requirement of a muslim being a renowned educationist in the field of traditional Madarsa-Education can only be nominated as Chairman of the Board and in view of the interpretation of the ''Educationist'' under the aforesaid judgment the opposite party No. 6 prima facie lacks inherent basic qualification for being nominated/ appointed as Chairman of the Board.

Issue notice to the opposite party No. 6, to show cause in what authority he is holding office and why a writ of quo warrantor be not issued against him.

Let the notice be served at his place of posting through Chairman, Madarsa Board of Education.

It is informed by the counsel for the Petitioner that Sri Mohd. Ahsan Raza Khan had resigned from the post of Chairperson of the Board on 27.9.2010 and as such the Writ Petition No. 8307 (MB) of 2010; Chaudhary Imtiyaz Ahmad [P.I.L.] Civil v. State of U.P. and Ors. was dismissed as in fructuous.

It is thereafter that by the impugned notification dated 21.12.2010, the opposite party No. 6 has been appointed as Chairperson of the Board.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the present incumbent of the Board does not fulfill the requisite qualification prescribed for the post u/s 3(3)(a) of the Act of 2004 and it is against the judgment and order dated 29.5.2009 passed in Writ Petition No. 55955 of 2008; Abdul Haq Khan v. State of U.P. and Ors. and Writ Petition No. 20510 of 2008; the Teacher Association Madarsa Arabia and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Ors. as well as the observations made in the order dated 25.8.2010 passed in Writ Petition No. 8307 (MB) of 2010 through which this Court has quashed the earlier notification dated 14.12.2007 regarding the appointment of Sri Haji Rizwanul Haque and Sri Gayasuddin Nadvi as Chairperson and Member respectively and has issued notices to the second Chairperson namely Sri Mohd. Ahsan Raza Khan who has thereafter resigned from the post in question.

It is contended that the bare perusal of the bio-data of the opposite party No. 6 would reveal that he has received simple education from Gorakhpur University and has done M.A. in English Literature from Aligarh University, M.A. in Urdu Literature from Avadh University and Adeeb Kamil Samiya Urdu Aligarh. It is also clear from the bio-data that the opposite party No. 6 has retired from the post of Lecturer from N.D. College, Jalalpur, Ambedkar Nagar. It is submitted that the bio-data of the opposite party No. 6 does not show that he has studied in a Madarsa recognized by the Board and he has got any extraordinary qualification in the field of Madarsa Education system or he has done any research work in the Madarsa Education system. As such it can easily be opined that opposite party No. 6 is simply a teacher/lecturer in English in a Degree College and has no special knowledge of Madarsa Education and as such he does not fulfill the qualification prescribed u/s 3(3)(a) of the Act of 2004.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner in support of his arguments heavily relies on the judgment and order dated 29.5.2009 passed Writ Petition No. 55955 of 2008; Abdul Haq Khan v. State of U.P. and Ors. and Writ Petition No. 20510 of 2008; the Teacher Association Madarsa Arabia and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Ors., copy of which is annexed as Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition.

This Court while deciding the aforesaid writ petitions had come to the conclusion that Sri Haji Rizwanul Haque and Sri Gayasuddin Nadvi who were appointed as Chairperson and Member of the Board respectively were not having any knowledge of theory or method of teaching and they were neither involved in any kind of teaching nor they did any work of education. Sri Haji Rizwanul Hque is enrolled as an Advocate and he has never been in the profession of teaching. Sri Gayasuddin Nadvi is not a teacher in any institution. In this view of the matter, the Court had come to the conclusion that both the aforesaid persons did not fulfill the eligibility criteria for being nominated as Chairperson and Member of the Board respectively. The notification made for the appointment of the said persons was as such quashed.

In the present case, the opposite party No. 6-Anwar Ahmad (Anwar Jalalpuri) is a teacher in English Literature and also possess the degree in Urdu Literature and Adeeb Kamil Samiya Urdu Aligarh. He has been the Member of Executive Council, Urdu Arbi Farsi, Lucknow University, Lucknow, ex-Member of U.P. Urdu Academy, ex-Member U.P. State Haz Committee and ex-Member, Zila Vidhik Nyay Pradhikaran (Lok Adalat), Ambedkar Nagar and he has number of books published in Urdu poetry, Gazal and Literature to his credit. He has regular appearance in various programmes organized at Television and has participated in Mushaiara and Kavi Sammelans at various levels.

Mr. D.K. Upadhyay, learned Chief Standing Counsel has informed that the opposite party No. 6 is a renowned Urdu poet.

We have no reason to belief that a person who is involved in teaching profession and has knowledge of Urdu Literature and has written so many books and is a renowned Urdu poet does not have the knowledge of traditional Madarsa Education. The opposite party No. 6 appears to have sufficient knowledge and experience of method of teaching. There is nothing on record to substantiate the contention raised by the counsel for the Petitioner. The bio-data of the opposite party No. 6, copy of which is annexed as Annexure No. 9 to the writ petition, show that he has experience of teaching and knowledge of Urdu Literature. As such we do not find any reason to interfere with the appointment of the opposite party No. 6 as Chairperson of the Board.

The writ petition being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed, it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.